Regina v Harvey [2000] NSWCCA 253

Regina v Harvey [2000] NSWCCA 253

The application succeeded only to the extent that leave to appeal against sentence was granted. The appeal was dismissed because the sentencing judge had taken s 16G into account, the applicant's misunderstanding of Wong and Leung did not show error, the attempt did not involve less criminal responsibility on the facts, and the five-year head sentence was consistent with applicable sentencing principles and comparable cases for mid-range drug offences.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 July 2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['attempt to Obtain Possession of Prohibited Imports' 'amphetamine' 'mid Range Drug Importation Offences' 'section 16 G Reduction' 'manifest Excess']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['attempt to Obtain Possession of Prohibited Imports' 'amphetamine' 'mid Range Drug Importation Offences' 'section 16 G Reduction' 'manifest Excess']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant's role should be treated as broadly similar to that of a courier or as a middle-man in the hierarchy of the importation." 'Whether the sentencing judge failed to apply or explain the reduction required by s 16G of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth).' 'Whether the guideline sentences in R v Wong and Leung [1999] NSWCCA 420 required a lower sentence for an amphetamine offence after a further s 16G reduction.' 'Whether an attempt to obtain possession should attract a lower sentence than obtaining possession on the facts of this case.' 'Whether the sentence of five years with a non-parole period of two years and thirty-three weeks was manifestly excessive.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application succeeded only to the extent that leave to appeal against sentence was granted. The appeal was dismissed because the sentencing judge had taken s 16G into account, the applicant's misunderstanding of Wong and Leung did not show error, the attempt did not involve less criminal responsibility on the facts, and the five-year head sentence was consistent with applicable sentencing principles and comparable cases for mid-range drug offences.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal against sentence be granted.' 'Appeal dismissed.']